### Table 1: This table illustrates the effect of depth error on the computed affine invariants of the fifth point for each frames. The error is computed for 0.5m distance between the camera and cubes. The entries of the table show the percent deviation of a one sigma invariant coordinate error, relative to the unit distance in the affine coordinate frame. The three error deviations, one for each coordinate, are enclosed in parentheses. The Euler angles for the rotation of the viewing direction relative to the object are indicated as a triple along the left side of the table. Each column of the table corresponds to a different affine frame.

1995

"... In PAGE 4: ... Each of the distinct frames is inserted in the model library as a separate instance of the model and has an associated invariant index. As seen from Table1 , there is a very significant difference inindexingpowerbetween the best and worst choice of affine frame. For example, for rotation (-45, 35, 0), the first row of the table, the worst of two error deviations goes down from 10.... ..."

Cited by 1

### Table 1. The first 5 individuals in the fifth generation

"... In PAGE 7: ... F(1), F(2), F(3), F(4), and F(5) represent the fines imposed for crime type1, type2, type3, type4 and type5 respectively. Table1 shows the dispersed deterrence patterns from the first 5 individuals in the fifth generation taken from one of the experiment. And table 2 shows the corresponding patterns in the 21-st generation where the deterrence patterns are converging and lower social costs are attained.... ..."

### Table 3: Plausibility values after the fifth cycle

1992

Cited by 23

### Table 9: Fifth step of Algorithm 4

2000

"... In PAGE 97: ... The line associated to 9 is thus completely lled during the fourth it- eration and the processor associated to this dart stop at this iteration. In the same way, the line associated to 11 (line 2) is lled during the fth iteration ( Table9 ) and its array F irst(:; 11) is equal to: F irst(0; 11) = 5; F irst(1; 11) = 5; F irst(2; 11) = 5 F irst(3; 11) = 5; F irst(4; 11) = 11 Note that we have (Figure 4): 0( 11) = 5; 1( 11) = 5; 2( 11) = 5; 3( 11) = 5; 4( 11) = 11 This equality between F irst(j; d) and j(d) is justi ed by the following propo- sition: Proposition 19 With the same notations as Proposition 14 the array First initialized by Algorithm 4 satis es the following property: 8d 2 D; 8j 2 f0; : : : ; min(level(d) 1; i)g F irst(j; d) = j(d)... ..."

Cited by 6